PITTSBURGH, Sept. 25 -- The government of Iran has told the International Atomic Energy Agency that it is building a previously undisclosed uranium enrichment plant for making fuel, the nuclear watchdog agency said Friday.

President Obama will call attention to the existence of the underground facility in an early-morning statement to reporters here before the opening of the G-20 economic summit, and will say that Western intelligence agencies have been tracking the facility for years. U.S. officials said Obama decided to disclose the program's existence after learning that Iran had become aware that it was no longer a secret.

Obama's statement, which will be made jointly with the leaders of France and Great Britain, was added to his schedule late Thursday night. It comes a day after Obama chaired a United Nations Security Council session on halting the spread of nuclear weapons throughout the world.

Although Obama referred to the nuclear ambitions of both Iran and North Korea during the session, diplomatic maneuvering kept any mention of the two countries out of a resolution that the council unanimously approved. The omission prompted passionate criticism from French President Nicolas Sarkozy, who will join Obama and British Prime Minister Gordon Brown Friday morning to decry Iran's newly disclosed facility.

"How, before the eyes of the world, could we justify meeting without tackling them?" Sarkozy scolded Thursday, referring to Iran and North Korea. "We live in the real world, not a virtual world. And the real world expects us to take decisions."

The global standoff over Iran's nuclear program began in 2002 with the discovery of two large nuclear facilities in Natanz and Arak, with the Natanz facility devoted to uranium enrichment. In Arak, a plutonium-fuel reactor was being constructed. U.S. intelligence had secretly provided the geographical coordinates of the facilities to the IAEA three months before an Iranian exile group drew attention to the facilities at an August news conference in Washington.

The public exposure led to demands that IAEA inspect the facilities, which it did in 2003, and ultimately to Iran's admission that it had kept its nuclear program hidden for 18 years in violation of an international treaty.

Iran acknowledged its third facility in a Sept. 21 letter to the IAEA which stated "that a new pilot fuel enrichment plant is under construction in the country," agency spokesman Marc Vidricaire said. "The letter stated that the enrichment level would be up to 5 percent."

Vidricaire said the Vienna-based agency responded by asking Iran to quickly provide more specifics about the facility -- "to assess safeguards verification requirements." He said Iran told the IAEA "that no nuclear material has been introduced into the facility."

Obama and other Western leaders have been trying to increase pressure on Iran to disclose more about its nuclear ambitions in advance of international talks next week about Iran's nuclear program. On Oct. 1, a senior Iranian diplomat will meet counterparts from the United States, Russia, China, Britain, France and Germany in Geneva.

"We expect a serious response from Iran," during the talks, British Foreign Secretary David Miliband said this week in a statement approved by the six nations. If such a response is not forthcoming, he said, the six nations will decide on "next steps."

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said in an interview this week that he is willing to have Iran's nuclear experts meet with scientists from the United States and other world powers as a confidence-building measure.

Ahmadinejad insisted that Iran is using nuclear technology only for energy and medical purposes and has no interest in acquiring nuclear weapons. He said he wants to buy enriched uranium from the United States that would be used for medical purposes.

The nuclear material Iran is now producing is 3 to 5 percent enriched and suitable only for energy purposes. Nuclear material for medical purposes must be 20 percent enriched -- purchasing such material would require a waver of international sanctions. While weapons-grade material is more than 90 percent enriched, making material for the medical reactor could put Iran on the next step to reaching that level.

In Tehran Friday, Iranian state television revealed the Sept.21 letter on its Arabic language news channel, Al-Alam, which is often used to transmit important official Iranian foreign policy decisions. The report quoted an unnamed source who described the letter as further evidence of Tehran's transparency in dealing with the IAEA about its nuclear program. It repeated Iran's long-held assertion that it is acquiring nuclear technology for peaceful purposes.

This is all playing towards an Israeli attack on Iran's reactors, thus the removal of the missile shield by Obama to appease Russia to get buyoff on such an attack.

***SPRAYER

09-25-2009, 07:48 AM

This is all playing towards an Israeli attack on Iran's reactors, thus the removal of the missile shield by Obama to appease Russia to get buyoff on such an attack.

Everybody was looking for the quid pro quo---

I think you nailed it.

memyselfI

09-25-2009, 07:52 AM

Information the US has had for TWO YEARS. :rolleyes:

Distraction from domestic failings at home and policy and Afghanistan. Nothing more.

BigRedChief

09-25-2009, 07:53 AM

This is all playing towards an Israeli attack on Iran's reactors, thus the removal of the missile shield by Obama to appease Russia to get buyoff on such an attack.If true, sounds like a good deal to me. Those mullahs getting their hands on neuclear weapons is a much bigger threat to us than some missle defense shield of europe that we can now do better and cheaper than that old $1,000,000,000,000.00 cold war relic that was scrapped.

BigRedChief

09-25-2009, 07:54 AM

Information the US has had for TWO YEARS. :rolleyes:

Distraction from domestic failings at home and policy and Afghanistan. Nothing more.
jeezzzzz Iran was the one who spilled the beans. You think Iran did it to help out Obama?

memyselfI

09-25-2009, 07:58 AM

jeezzzzz Iran was the one who spilled the beans. You think Iran did it to help out Obama?

President Obama will call attention to the existence of the underground facility in an early-morning statement to reporters here before the opening of the G-20 economic summit, and will say that Western intelligence agencies have been tracking the facility for years. U.S. officials said Obama decided to disclose the program's existence after learning that Iran had become aware that it was no longer a secret.

Iran apparently knew the US was going to break the news in some kind of dramatic fashion so they sent a letter to try to preempt the US.

Checkmate.

Put Lite on the defensive and force his hand.

BigRedChief

09-25-2009, 08:00 AM

Iran apparently knew the US was going to break the news in some kind of dramatic fashion so they sent a letter to try to preempt the US.

Checkmate.
ooohhh okay, you have inside information about future White House policy....got it.:rolleyes:

memyselfI

09-25-2009, 08:02 AM

ooohhh okay, you have inside information about future White House policy....got it.:rolleyes:

How about reading the article or watching MSNBC.

President Obama will call attention to the existence of the underground facility in an early-morning statement to reporters here before the opening of the G-20 economic summit, and will say that Western intelligence agencies have been tracking the facility for years. U.S. officials said Obama decided to disclose the program's existence after learning that Iran had become aware that it was no longer a secret.

BigRedChief

09-25-2009, 08:09 AM

How about reading the article or watching MSNBC.
so? if its no longer a secret, why not disclose it? Are we not trying to get those neuclear enrichment plants shut down? Are we not trying to enlist the world to help out? Why would he not use it to get world opinion behind our goals(if its no longer a secret), which I agree with, shutting down Iran's neclear enrichment program.

We are not being distracted by this. No way Obama is going to start anything with Iran, he will let Israel bomb those plants.

He already has 3 wars(Iraq,Afghanistan,terriosm) going to "distract" us. You think a 4th war will make us more distracted? And he's doing it for purely political reasons?

memyselfI

09-25-2009, 08:16 AM

so? if its no longer a secret, why not disclose it? Are we not trying to get those neuclear enrichment plants shut down? Are we not trying to enlist the world to help out? Why would he not use it to get world opinion behind our goals(if its no longer a secret), which I agree with, shutting down Iran's neclear enrichment program.

We are not being distracted by this. No way Obama is going to start anything with Iran, he will let Israel bomb those plants.

He already has 3 wars(Iraq,Afghanistan,terriosm) going to "distract" us. You think a 4th war will make us more distracted? And he's doing it for purely political reasons?

If Israel bombs Iran with covert US approval using US supplied arms then it's the US attacking by proxy. EVERYONE realizes this. No freakin way the US can pretend they are not involved.

It's a political move because support for Afghanistan is waning both in the US and abroad. Iraq is not far behind though it's leveled out for the time being. What better way to keep the American public on pins and needles and try to manipulate foreign governments to keep their commitments in both Iraq and Afghanistan than to escalate the importance of the Iranian issue at this moment.

Likewise, what better way to get an increasingly disenchanted and disillusioned POTUS behind their guy than to start up beating the national security drums. See the recent flurry of arrests, increased alerts, and now two year old breaking news.

And with some politico novices and ignoramuses it will actually work. Because they won't think to look at the how and why of the US motives only at what they are told is happening to us. :rolleyes:

dirk digler

09-25-2009, 08:18 AM

This is all playing towards an Israeli attack on Iran's reactors, thus the removal of the missile shield by Obama to appease Russia to get buyoff on such an attack.

I was watching O'Reilly last night and the military advisors he had on said that Israel doesn't have the capability to attack Iran's underground nuke facilities only the US has that capability.

memyselfI

09-25-2009, 08:20 AM

I was watching O'Reilly last night and the military advisors he had on said that Israel doesn't have the capability to attack Iran's underground nuke facilities only the US has that capability.

And if Israel suddenly ends up with that capacity then it's the US attacking by proxy. :doh!:

dirk digler

09-25-2009, 08:24 AM

And if Israel suddenly ends up with that capacity then it's the US attacking by proxy. :doh!:

They didn't seem to think that was likely. They said Israel probably will attack and mostly fail.

They both agreed Obama wouldn't have the US attack Iran.

Bwana

09-25-2009, 08:32 AM

I was watching O'Reilly last night and the military advisors he had on said that Israel doesn't have the capability to attack Iran's underground nuke facilities only the US has that capability.

Well then, it's time to "lend" Israel a few toys. :)

BucEyedPea

09-25-2009, 08:41 AM

Gotta be careful of these reports on Iran. No different than the buildup to Iraq was.
Same people. Mossad has been using MEK, paid terrorists who hate Iranians, who are as reliable as Chalabi was and there may even be more falsified documents just as the yellowcake forgeries were on Iraq.
IAEA has denied and contradicted some of these reports which isn't reported. And yes this stuff can be, and is, planted on the newswires.

Donger

09-25-2009, 08:48 AM

Gotta be careful of these reports on Iran. No different than the buildup to Iraq was.
Same people. Mossad has been using MEK, paid terrorists who hate Iranians, who are as reliable as Chalabi was and there may even be more falsified documents just as the yellowcake forgeries were on Iraq.
IAEA has denied and contradicted some of these reports which isn't reported. And yes this stuff can be, and is, planted on the newswires.

Iran

admits

to

having

a

second

undisclosed

enrichment

plant

patteeu

09-25-2009, 08:50 AM

He already has 3 wars(Iraq,Afghanistan,terriosm) going to "distract" us. You think a 4th war will make us more distracted? And he's doing it for purely political reasons?

This is all one war. And it's already being fought in places other than the ones you mentioned.

BigRedChief

09-25-2009, 08:51 AM

This is all one war. And it's already being fought in places other than the ones you mentioned.
I call BS. Iraq was not about terrorism or Al-Quaeda.

BucEyedPea

09-25-2009, 08:52 AM

Iran

admits

to

having

a

second

undisclosed

enrichment

plant
So. It also has a right to develop nuclear power or energy per its treaty.

patteeu

09-25-2009, 08:52 AM

Iran

admits

to

having

a

second

undisclosed

enrichment

plant

Those admissions were made by Iranian neocons!

patteeu

09-25-2009, 08:53 AM

I call BS. Iraq was not about terrorism or Al-Quaeda.

Of course it was. Where have you been for the past 7+ years?

dirk digler

09-25-2009, 08:54 AM

Those admissions were made by Iranian neocons!

You forgot agent provocateurs

petegz28

09-25-2009, 08:54 AM

I call BS. Iraq was not about terrorism or Al-Quaeda.

So when Al-Qaeda issued a statement that the war front was in Iraq, that meant what?

BucEyedPea

09-25-2009, 08:55 AM

I call BS. Iraq was not about terrorism or Al-Quaeda.

I agree with you on this one BRC. That's just a "bait and switch" to take out Israel's terrorists instead of our own, which is not sponsored by a nation-state. Iran had nothing to do with 9/11 and AQ is one of its enemies too.

The Neo-Crazies in both parties are exploiting 9/11 and terrorism for the Likudnik party in Israel.

BucEyedPea

09-25-2009, 08:56 AM

Did pat say something?

petegz28

09-25-2009, 08:57 AM

Did pat say something?

Ok, stop with that, BEP....

dirk digler

09-25-2009, 08:58 AM

Did pat say something?

LMAO

Are you in 2nd grade?

BigRedChief

09-25-2009, 08:58 AM

So when Al-Qaeda issued a statement that the war front was in Iraq, that meant what?
That was after we invaded and made convient targets for them.

You trying to say that before the American invasion Al-Quaeda was entrenched in Iraq? Thats why we invaded?

Donger

09-25-2009, 09:01 AM

So. It also has a right to develop nuclear power or energy per its treaty.

Only when it meets certain inspection guidelines, which Iran has not done. That is why they are in trouble with the UN.

BucEyedPea

09-25-2009, 09:02 AM

This is the same crowd as the AEI crowd at work on this issue here implementing the same

A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm (http://www.israeleconomy.org/strat1.htm)

"Benjamin Netanyahu’s government comes in with a new set of ideas." [ One, a Likudnik, pushing for an attack on Iran]

BucEyedPea

09-25-2009, 09:04 AM

Only when it meets certain inspection guidelines, which Iran has not done. That is why they are in trouble with the UN.

That is a false report, which you seen inclined to rely on as were the Iraq reports. The fact is, the inspections are not set up to inspect in a way to make a determination of any allegations. There were never set up for that. I posted this before but you ignore it.

I rely on Raimondo's who turned out to be correct about Iraq. Not perfect but overwhelmingly more correct than the last set of half-truths, forgeries and false reports particularly on key facts. He has three former CIA writing for him including one who defected under Bush because they were leaning on the CIA to fit the intel to the policy. The CIA, then, was cleaned out of any dissenters and replaced with lackeys.

patteeu

09-25-2009, 09:04 AM

I agree with you on this one BRC. That's just a "bait and switch" to take out Israel's terrorists instead of our own, which is not sponsored by a nation-state. Iran had nothing to do with 9/11 and AQ is one of its enemies too.

The Neo-Crazies in both parties are exploiting 9/11 and terrorism for the Likudnik party in Israel.

Both Iran and Iraq have to do with the problem of violent, anti-western civilization, islamist jihadism. They are both rogue states that have supported these violent actors and used them to further their policy goals. The GWoT is a fight against the entire network of terrorists and their state sponsors not just a mission to bring a narrow group of 9/11 perpetrators to justice.

I agree with you on this one BRC. That's just a "bait and switch" to take out Israel's terrorists instead of our own, which is not sponsored by a nation-state. Iran had nothing to do with 9/11 and AQ is one of its enemies too.

The Neo-Crazies in both parties are exploiting 9/11 and terrorism for the Likudnik party in Israel.
uhhhh I don't think this is a bait and switch to help out a political party in Israel. Your postings on this sound pretty close to Anti-Semetic though.....you got some issue with Jews we need to know about?

***SPRAYER

09-25-2009, 09:07 AM

But it's OK, he can sit down with them. All will be fine soon.

B.O. is gonna change it! B.O. is gonna heal the world!

BucEyedPea

09-25-2009, 09:08 AM

You forgot agent provocateurs

I see you need a dictionary again. There's nothing of that nature stated in my recent posts. That would be someone who goes out and commits an act, usually illegal, to discredit a group to make them look bad to the public. Usually done from the inside. This is just basic lying including, but not limited to, false documentation or using a source that is unreliable. Think Chalabi or MEK.

Donger

09-25-2009, 09:13 AM

That is a false report, which you seen inclined to rely on as were the Iraq reports. The fact is, the inspections are not set up to inspect in a way to make a determination of any allegations. There were never set up for that. I posted this before but you ignore it.

I rely on Raimondo's who turned out to be correct about Iraq. Not perfect but overwhelmingly more correct than the last set of half-truths, forgeries and false reports particularly on key facts. He has three former CIA writing for him including one who defected under Bush because they were leaning on the CIA to fit the intel to the policy. The CIA, then, was cleaned out of any dissenters and replaced with lackeys.

Not revealing this second plant is also a violation, one Iran ADMITS to.

You're nuts.

BucEyedPea

09-25-2009, 09:13 AM

uhhhh I don't think this is a bait and switch to help out a political party in Israel. Your postings on this sound pretty close to Anti-Semetic though.....you got some issue with Jews we need to know about?

There is nothing anti-semitic in my posts. Not supporting Likudnik, is no different than some Israelis disagreeing with each other. We're talkign about a political party of a state—not an entired people. You need a dictionary as anti-semitism is hatred of Jews. I could say you're anti-Persian too but I don't think your position has anything to do with that.

I happen to be a member of J-Street set up as a Jewish group that is against Likudnick, the Israeli version of the NeoCons. You're doing what most lefties ( includes NeoCons) due when they see racism everywhere—trying to stifle debate and dissent. This is usually the cry and badge of a NeoCon to use this tactic. It is intellectually dishonest and a cop-out.

This has nothing to do with Jewish people as a group who are overwhelmingly liberal. It has to do with a faction in Israel. I support a two state solution but I oppose direct military involvement by the US to fight for Israel when they get arms and other support already. I certainly draw the line at another ME war that will have worse consequences for the United States. It's reckless and criminal. FTR my Jewish friends agree with me.

petegz28

09-25-2009, 09:14 AM

That was after we invaded and made convient targets for them.

You trying to say that before the American invasion Al-Quaeda was entrenched in Iraq? Thats why we invaded?

irrelevant

BigRedChief

09-25-2009, 09:16 AM

irrelevant
how so? Just enlighten us all of why we went into Iraq in the first place?

BucEyedPea

09-25-2009, 09:17 AM

Not revealing this second plant is also a violation, one Iran ADMITS to.

I'm a nutty warmonger and I like this because now we can bomb them.

Link? Also fixed your post.

BigRedChief

09-25-2009, 09:18 AM

I happen to be a member of J-Street set up as a Jewish group that is against Likudnick, the Israeli version of the NeoCons.
Why are you affiliated with an Israeli political party?

BucEyedPea

09-25-2009, 09:18 AM

how so? Just enlighten us all of why we went into Iraq in the first place?

Main reason was he had violated UN resolutions on disarming and had WMD. That's what the bulk of the US resolution stated. Secondary issues were SH being a thug and US security—which was mostly an aftersight. Certainly was minimally mentioned.

dirk digler

09-25-2009, 09:18 AM

I see you need a dictionary again. There's nothing of that nature stated in my recent posts. That would be someone who goes out and commits an act, usually illegal, to discredit a group to make them look bad to the public. Usually done from the inside. This is just basic lying including, but not limited to, false documentation or using a source that is unreliable. Think Chalabi or MEK.

I know what it means I just like to poke a little fun at you. You are awful sensitive have you not got any in awhile?

BucEyedPea

09-25-2009, 09:19 AM

Why are you affiliated with an Israeli political party?

I didn't say that.Please read what I posted.

BucEyedPea

09-25-2009, 09:20 AM

I know what it means I just like to poke a little fun at you. You are awful sensitive have not got any in awhile?

You are projecting. I think you're being sensitive. I'm just responding to what you posted.
Don't hide behind it dirk it was a passive-aggressive barb.

mikey23545

09-25-2009, 09:20 AM

LMAO

Are you in 2nd grade?

No, but she <i>is</i> a woman...same difference.

BucEyedPea

09-25-2009, 09:23 AM

No, but she <i>is</i> a woman...same difference.

ROFL Heh! That one cracked me up.

Honest to gawd, though, you guys complain about the lefties here. You are just like them when it comes to your pet issues.

Instead of seeing "racism" in things "anti-semitism" is seen.

Don't forget you guys are out of power for a reason. It's no coincidence that your branch of conservatism is called "crazy" or "delusional."

dirk digler

09-25-2009, 09:23 AM

You are projecting. I think you're being sensitive. I'm just responding to what you posted.
Don't hide behind it dirk it was a passive-aggressive barb.

Hide behind what? Having a little fun at BEP's expense?

Seriously though why do you defend Iran they are a terrorist state that has been attacking the US and US interests for a long time. If it wasn't for the fact that alot of their citizens love the west I would just say nuke them and be done with them.

dirk digler

09-25-2009, 09:25 AM

ROFL Heh! That one cracked me up.

Honest to gawd, though, you guys complain about the lefties here. You are just like them when it comes to your pet issues.

Instead of seeing "racism" in things "anti-semitism" is seen.

Don't forget you guys are out of power for a reason. It's no coincidence that your branch of conservatism is called "crazy" or "delusional."

I will defend you on this. I find it funny and ironic the same people that whine about people calling others racist are quick to drop the anti-Semitic card.

BucEyedPea

09-25-2009, 09:26 AM

Dirk,
Because Iran had nothing to do with 9/11. I don't believe in killing for "interests" as I've said before it's vague. Where that has happened we were on ME land with military installations or directly intervening in their conflict. Expect to be attacked when over there. This is why Reagan pulled out of Beirut and I've quoted what he said about more involvment in the ME from his biography numerous times.

BigRedChief

09-25-2009, 09:26 AM

Hide behind what? Having a little fun at BEP's expense?

Seriously though why do you defend Iran they are a terrorist state that has been attacking the US and US interests for a long time. If it wasn't for the fact that alot of their citizens love the west I would just say nuke them and be done with them.
right, it's the mullahs that need to be thrown out. But because of the way the USA has treated Iran in the past, we can't interfere or alienate those people in Iran that have no desire for Jihad and want closer ties with the West.

wild1

09-25-2009, 09:30 AM

I knew by page 4 of this thread, it would be our fault.

We should just reject rogue nations like Germany, the UK, and Canada. All we need to do is prostrate ourselves before Iran and beg forgiveness, and all will be well.

BucEyedPea

09-25-2009, 09:31 AM

This is my general opinion regarding our involvement in the ME, militarily anyway. Occupation or perceiving that there's occupation ( military bases) is the cause of terrorism. This stuff began under Bush Sr, expanded under Clinton and really went wild under Bush Jr.

"Perhaps we didn't appreciate fully enough the depth of the hatred and the complexity of the problems that made the Middle East such a jungle. Perhaps the idea of a suicide car bomber committing mass murder to gain instant entry to Paradise was so foreign to our own values and consciousness that it did not create in us the concern for the Marines' safety that it should have. In the weeks immediately after the bombing, I believed the last thing that we should do was turn tail and leave. Yet the irrationality of Middle Eastern politics forced us to rethink our policy there. If there would be some rethinking of policy before our men die, we would be a lot better off. If that policy had changed towards more of a neutral position and neutrality, those 241 Marines would be alive today."-- Ronald Reagan's Autobiography

So I guess wild thinks Ronald Regan is also blaming America? ( The standard unthinking, take no responsibility for certain policy attitude which is the opposite of conservativis, which is all about taking responsibility for one's condition.)

patteeu

09-25-2009, 09:32 AM

I see you need a dictionary again. There's nothing of that nature stated in my recent posts. That would be someone who goes out and commits an act, usually illegal, to discredit a group to make them look bad to the public. Usually done from the inside. This is just basic lying including, but not limited to, false documentation or using a source that is unreliable. Think Chalabi or MEK.

What did Chalabi lie or prove unreliable about?

dirk digler

09-25-2009, 09:32 AM

Dir,
Because Iran had nothing to do with 9/11. I don't believe in killing for "interests" as I've said before it's vague. Where that has happened we were on ME land with military installations or directly intervening in their conflict. Expect to be attacked when over there. This is why Reagan pulled out of Beirut and I've quoted what he said about more involvment in the ME from his biography numerous times.

We still owe them payback for the Marine Barracks bombings. Fuck em.

patteeu

09-25-2009, 09:37 AM

Dirk,
Because Iran had nothing to do with 9/11. I don't believe in killing for "interests" as I've said before it's vague. Where that has happened we were on ME land with military installations or directly intervening in their conflict. Expect to be attacked when over there. This is why Reagan pulled out of Beirut and I've quoted what he said about more involvment in the ME from his biography numerous times.

Your "quote" was false though. Ron Paul appears to have lied (although maybe it was another one of his ghostwriters who did it while he remained blissfully unaware).

BucEyedPea

09-25-2009, 09:38 AM

We still owe them payback for the Marine Barracks bombings. **** em.

Good example of why you're a lefty and the self-proclaimed righties on this board are on the left too.

We didn't belong there. Get involved in someone's fight expect to get hit. You're responsible for that. So you have helped bring terror to our soil.

We are responsible for the condition of this country because of who we elect. It's not like we have a monarchy or dictator. That includes our current fiscal state which is that we're bankrupt. Bankupt due to bankrupt policy and ideas.

You are part of the problem—not the solution.

HonestChieffan

09-25-2009, 09:40 AM

Do you agree we are still at war with the extreme elements of Islam?

Removing the issue from bases in middle east or the reasons Militant extreme islam has risen in power in those countries, wouldn't you agree they have every intention to do as much damage as possible to non islamic/christian and jewish people anywhere they can?

BucEyedPea

09-25-2009, 09:40 AM

I've said all I've had to say for now in this thread. It's gonna just be a re-hash including of the same arguments for going into Iraq.

patteeu

09-25-2009, 09:41 AM

I've said all I've had to say for now in this thread. It's gonna just be a re-hash including of the same arguments for going into Iraq.

Running away now that your oft-repeated lie about Reagan is about to be exposed?

BucEyedPea

09-25-2009, 09:45 AM

Do you agree we are still at war with the extreme elements of Islam?
I see no need to be at war with them when military bases could be removed as part of the solution. Now that doesn't mean we should not use any military at all....just not an all out conventional warfare until each govt in the ME is knocked down. AQ is in central Asia.

Removing the issue from bases in middle east or the reasons Militant extreme islam has risen in power in those countries, wouldn't you agree they have every intention to do as much damage as possible to non islamic/christian and jewish people anywhere they can?

This will take me too long to answer and I have to go. I've posted at length, including threads on how terror should be handled. It is a tactic and AQ is not sponsored by any nation state. It sponsored the Taliban which is in reverse.

I think they want us off their land at the very minimum. I think this would have prevented terrorism coming home to us as it was the final straw. Bin Laden even stated that in his fatwah regarding 9/11.

Also no more US puppet govts supported with millions of dollars in US foreign aid. I don't know if that could or would be wise to stop and I do think we have to be more of an honest broker on the Pal/Isr conflict but at least get the bases out wherever we can. We used our ships from the Gulf in the past. That should be good enough.

Oh and I have no intention of engaging pat in his neocon fantasies which I've already done before repeatedly. It's a waste of time.

dirk digler

09-25-2009, 09:49 AM

Good example of why you're a lefty and the self-proclaimed righties on this board are on the left too.

We didn't belong there. Get involved in someone's fight expect to get hit. You're responsible for that. So you have helped bring terror to our soil.

We are responsible for the condition of this country because of who we elect. It's not like we have a monarchy or dictator. That includes our current fiscal state which is that we're bankrupt. Bankupt due to bankrupt policy and ideas.

You are part of the problem—not the solution.

I thought lefties were doves and pussies?

You call people so many names I can't keep track of them all.

Yeah I am responsible for all the terrorism in the US I am glad I have that much power.

All you fuckers better watch out.

Donger

09-25-2009, 09:49 AM

Link? Also fixed your post.

Iran was found in non-compliance with its NPT safeguards obligations in an unusual non-consensus decision because it "failed in a number of instances over an extended period of time" to report aspects of its enrichment program.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_Non-Proliferation_Treaty

ROYC75

09-25-2009, 09:52 AM

Good example of why you're a lefty and the self-proclaimed righties on this board are on the left too.

We didn't belong there. Get involved in someone's fight expect to get hit. You're responsible for that. So you have helped bring terror to our soil.

We are responsible for the condition of this country because of who we elect. It's not like we have a monarchy or dictator. That includes our current fiscal state which is that we're bankrupt. Bankupt due to bankrupt policy and ideas.

You are part of the problem—not the solution.

Oh, you just hang on, Obama is not done apologizing and kissing ass yet. There is still time for that.

A key question regarding the Qom site is whether Iran violated its obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty regarding when it has to inform international authorities of a new nuclear facility. Under the original treaty, such declarations were not required until six months before fuel was introduced into the facility.

In 1992, however, the IAEA board determined that six months was not enough time to organize required inspections, and amended the rule to require nations to inform it at the time the initial decision was made to build a facility, before construction began. The amendment, called "Code 3.1," was mandatory; Iran and all other signatories agreed to it.

But in 2006, angered over an IAEA decision to refer its case to the U.N. Security Council, Iran said its parliament had decided it would revert to the non-amended treaty and six-month notification.

The IAEA took the position that no country could legally revert to the old system, and that Iran and all countries were bound by the new rule.

"This is not the first time that Iran has concealed information about its nuclear program," Obama said Friday morning. "The size and configuration of this facility is inconsistent with a peaceful program."

FishingRod

09-25-2009, 11:02 AM

I was watching O'Reilly last night and the military advisors he had on said that Israel doesn't have the capability to attack Iran's underground nuke facilities only the US has that capability.

O'Rielly is at least partially mistaken. The Bush administration sold Israel exactly the kind of equipment needed to deal with this underground facility. The problem is that intelligence says that the Iranian program is scattered far and wide in many places. An airstrike on its major facilities would set back but not stop their nuclear program. The Pakistanis followed a very similar program and did in in the same manner so that they didn't have all of their nuclear eggs in one basket the way Iraq did before Israel bombed their program back to square one with a single attack. So they certainly can blow up a bunch of stuff but probably nothing short of and Iraq like occupation would put the program completely out of business.